On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 08:33:53AM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 16:20:48 -0400
> Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
>
> > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 04:46:03PM +0300, ppaala...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > From: Pekka Paalanen
> > >
> > > Mention, that sub-surfaces are not clipped to the par
On Fri, 17 May 2013 16:20:48 -0400
Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 04:46:03PM +0300, ppaala...@gmail.com wrote:
> > From: Pekka Paalanen
> >
> > Mention, that sub-surfaces are not clipped to the parent.
> > Be more accurate on surface commit vs. apply state.
> > Mention the i
On Fri, 17 May 2013 16:20:48 -0400
Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 04:46:03PM +0300, ppaala...@gmail.com wrote:
> > From: Pekka Paalanen
> >
> > Mention, that sub-surfaces are not clipped to the parent.
> > Be more accurate on surface commit vs. apply state.
> > Mention the i
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 04:46:03PM +0300, ppaala...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Pekka Paalanen
>
> Mention, that sub-surfaces are not clipped to the parent.
> Be more accurate on surface commit vs. apply state.
> Mention the initial stacking order.
That looks good, applied. I can't help thinking t
From: Pekka Paalanen
Mention, that sub-surfaces are not clipped to the parent.
Be more accurate on surface commit vs. apply state.
Mention the initial stacking order.
Signed-off-by: Pekka Paalanen
---
protocol/subsurface.xml | 27 +--
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1
